Disable Smilies in This Post. Show Signature: include your profile signature. Only registered users may have signatures.

*If HTML and/or UBB Code are enabled, this means you can use HTML and/or UBB Code in your message.

If you have previously registered, but forgotten your password, click here.

T O P I C R E V I E W

fredtrav

I just received quite a few signed covers. Among them were a couple of covers signed by the crew of STS-51G along with a signature of Greg Jarvis.

It has a note that Jarvis was supposed to fly on this mission, but I can not find any information on whether Jarvis was originally assigned to 51-G.

brianjbradley

Yes, 51G originally had two different payload specialists: Jarvis and Charlie Walker. They were replaced by Salman Al-Saud and Frank Baudry and assigned to later flights. The crew photo you speak of is posted on another space history sites, and listed under Cancelled Flights.

Correct me if I am wrong, but Jarvis was assigned to two other crews as well before his assignment to 51L.

51D but bumped by Jake Garn (who, according to Mike Mullane's book, dictated what flight he would take because of the Senate schedule)

61C but bumped by Bill Nelson (presumably for the same reason as Garn. I think I read this in Bob Hohler's book about Christa McAuliffe that described Jarvis' assignment to 51L even later in the training flow than her)

Cozmosis22

Have also read that he was scheduled to fly on earlier missions but cannot find any documentation just yet.

fredtrav

Thank you Brian for the information.

Hart Sastrowardoyo

Heard also Jarvis was also assigned to 51I, and I've also seen a signed cover with his signature for this flight.

Cozmosis22

Wow. Five assignments and he ended up on 51-L. Fate. Wonder if Hughes made any decals for his cancelled missions?

AJ

To me, this is one of the greatest tragedies of 51-L. I'm glad his memory is kept alive through collectors, historians, space enthusiasts, etc. So sad.

ilbasso

Mike Mullane spends some time discussing Jarvis in "Riding Rockets." He was pointing out the cavalier attitude NASA was showing, and the bowing to political pressure, in assigning people to missions who had not been trained as astronauts. Mullane did not impugn Jarvis's qualifications to fly on the Shuttle. However, he did note the irony that Jarvis, as a Hughes employee, was assigned to monitor and gather data on the deployment of a Hughes satellite, and was bumped from mission to mission to end up flying on one that did not have a Hughes payload.

hoorenz

Jarvis never was a member of STS-51G, as far as I remember.

At the time he and Walker were part of the Brandenstein crew, their mission was called 51D. When they were bumped by Bobko's crew, who had lost their 51E TDRS-B deployment mission, Walker remained with the vehicle (Discovery) because his EOS-equipment had already been installed on the middeck. He traded places with Patrick Baudry, whose echocardiography experiment was installed in one of Challenger's middeck lockers.

I think Jarvis was immediately reassigned from 51D to 51I, which was the next Leasat deployment mission. His place aboard the Brandenstein flight was taken by Al-Saud, who would oversee the Arabsat 1B deployment.

When 51I became a Leasat deploy AND repair mission (at the initiative of Van Hoften and Lounge), it was first thought that Jarvis, as a Leasat engineer, could play a major role on this flight. In the end, if I remember correctly, the very busy flightplan for the 51I mission (rendezvous and spacewalks) did not leave any room for a Payload Specialist and Jarvis and his experiments were reassigned to 61C. When this flight also ended up with three Payload Specialists, he was reassigned to 51L.

hoorenz

quote:Originally posted by Cozmosis22:Wonder if Hughes made any decals for his cancelled missions?

The 51L artwork shown here, was first made as an STS-51D version. It did not show the fluids experiment, but the red Leasat logo.

Glint

quote:Originally posted by hoorenz:...was the next Leasat deployment mission.

This is a little off topic, but your comment reminded me of a proposal I was involved in for a similar concept called Leasecraft. According to the proposal, on-orbit servicing would be performed by company employees.

Sensing an unprecedented once in a lifetime opportunity I made inquiries concerning application for the position and the selection process. Turned out the "employees" envisioned would be previously trained ex-astronauts as hired guns.

Unfortunately, the idea never got off the ground, in more ways than one.

Hart Sastrowardoyo

It's been my belief that there was a brief time 51D (Brandenstein) was a six-person crew, much like 51E was a six-person crew with Baudry as the only PS. Not only do I recall a payload manifest handbook with the info, but I used to have a Leasat poster signed by the crew (complete with 51D notation by most of them) with Jarvis sans Walker.

GoesTo11

quote:Originally posted by AJ:To me, this is one of the greatest tragedies of 51-L.

I agree. Jarvis' death in itself was of course no more or less tragic than the others', and yes, if not him it would have been someone else in that seat.

But the thought of Jarvis being booted like a football from one crew to the next in large part so that two politicians and a Saudi prince could fly still makes my teeth grind to this day.

hoorenz

quote:Originally posted by Hart Sastrowardoyo:I used to have a Leasat poster signed by the crew (complete with 51D notation by most of them) with Jarvis sans Walker.

I recall that something happened to Walker's EOS experiment on 41D, the samples got contaminated, and a reflight was negociated within weeks of the 41D landing. At first, Walker was assigned to 51A, but apparently NASA was unable to integrate him into that flight, so Hauck's flight remained a five person crew and Walker ended up on Brandenstein's 51D.

Remember that Crippen's 41G had been the first mission to have a 7 person crew and that at the time, at least in the media, it was considered as somewhat of an experiment. Would it be possible for seven people to live aboard a Shuttle for a week?

Maybe it was only after the completion of 41G that seven person crews were considered a realistic option. So when Garn came along in January 1985 and he had to get a seat, NASA knew 7 person crews were no problem and he was added to 51E with Baudry. This is how that flight became a seven person crew. From there on, having two Payload Specialists seems to have become standard practise.

Hart Sastrowardoyo

quote:Originally posted by hoorenz:Maybe it was only after the completion of 41G that seven person crews were considered a realistic option.

Was having a seven-person crew that big of a deal? STS-9 had six, as did 41D. Had STS-10 been reflown as STS-15 with two PSs, or 41C with Kerwin, they would have had six crewmembers.

I seem to recall the "standard" was five - CDR, PLT and up to three PSs. Or am I interpreting wrong an early Rockwell info sheet on the shuttle?

hoorenz

quote:Originally posted by Hart Sastrowardoyo:Was having a seven-person crew that big of a deal?

Yes, it was. Read Henry S.F. Cooper, "Before Lift-off." Page 125.

"Seven people bothers me a little," Dave (Leestma) said. "Five may be a bit big for company, but seven's a real crowd. What we'll do with seven people all up and about at the same time. I don't know. And there is a lot of concern about whether the waste-management system — the toilet — will hold up."

And, page 225.

Later Dave Leestma said to me: ,,We got along fine. But still, five plus two equals seven, and that's a crowd.'' He worried that since the flight had, in fact, worked out so well, NASA would decide that adding two payload specialists would be the way to go in the future.

About Kerwin/41C: I do not think he was ever supposed to be an additional, sixth crew member. He hoped to be on the flight, but already was out of the picture when the five man STS-13 crew (cdr+plt+3 MS's)was named.

Hart Sastrowardoyo

I was slightly wrong. From a March 1978 Rockwell document, Model Information/Space Shuttle ALT:

Normally, the Space Shuttle orbiter has an astronaut crew of three: commander, pilot and mission specialist. As many as four payload specialists can also be accommodated and there are provisions for both sexes.

So at least in the beginning, they were thinking of seven-person crews.

Tom

quote:Originally posted by Hart Sastrowardoyo:Had STS-10 been reflown as STS-15 with two PSs, or 41C with Kerwin, they would have had six crewmembers.

Was Kerwin ever considered on 41C?

hoorenz

I read somewhere sometime that Kerwin sticked around, hoping he would get assigned to the Solar Max repair mission (which was already mentioned as early as 1981). He was offered a Spacelab mission instead and left. So, no, I do not think he was ever considered for the flight, he only considered it a possibility himself.